On the recordDecember 16, 2010
Mr. President, I would note, as others have noted, that the treaty completely excludes consideration of a limitation on tactical nuclear weapons, even though Russia possesses a significant superiority in terms of numbers over the United States for these types of weapons. I would just note that some at the Department of Defense have noted that the difference between strategic weapons and tactical weapons has become somewhat muddled and less meaningful in recent decades. I believe a legitimate cause for concern is why we would exclude tactical nuclear weapons, that the Russians have numerical superiority of, and not even seek to regulate or contain those at all, while we are focused strictly on strategic nuclear weapons, of which the United States would have to cut our current numbers and the Russians not at all in order to meet the goals of the treaty. I would say, secondly, I have concerns about the treaty's provisions on verification. Of course, President Reagan was famous for saying we should trust, but verify when it comes to this type of treaty. I would point out that Brent Scowcroft, in 1997, pointed out the importance of when we are actually reducing the overall number of weapons, verification becomes that much more important. He said, in 1997: Current force levels provide a kind of buffer because they are high enough to be relatively insensitive to imperfect intelligence and modest force changes. . . .…





